EUIJ, Kansai Roundtable
TEACHING THE EU IN ASIA - CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONSINSTITUTIONAL, CURRICULAR AND METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES(Kobe University, 25-26 JANUARY 2008)

The idea behind the topic of the January 2008 Roundtable emerged from the realitythat beyond trade and political declarations, a solid way to increase the level of AsiaEurope interactions is developing the level of knowledge on each other, througheducational and academic initiatives. Today, considering the level of EU presence interms of trade, FDI and development programs in all the Asian countries,
understanding the way it functions should be taken as a priority. However, while the
Asian studies are relatively well represented within the European academic system not
the same can be said as regards the presence of European Studies in Asia. Neglect,
historical remorse or simply prioritization on the trans-Pacific area might explain thissituation.
The

first

European/EUStudies

programs

timidly

appearedin

Asia in the second part of the last decade. There were failures and success stories.
The success stories were measured mostly against the ability to survive beyond
the initial grant coming from Brussels.

Thus, after more than ten years ofexperimenting the “implant” of European Studies in Asia, we have considered that it istime for a general comparative review of the past and current experiences in order toplace this academic discipline on a more practical and strategic path, in accordancewith the current Asian realities.
Some of the questions the organizers intended to approach where the following: whatis the current European Studies situation in Asia? what are the major difficulties
encountered? are there examples of best practice? is there a need for a curricula
adjustment in Asia? what are the most relevant Europe/EU topics in the Asian context?
what are the best teaching methodologies in Asia? what are the institutional andmanagerial challenges? what are the perspectives ?

1

The EUIJ Roundtable was intended to be principally a gathering of Asian specialists on
Europe/EU. Thus, there were participants from China, Singapore, Thailand, India, thePhilippines, Korea and Germany (on behalf of the ESC Program in China). From Japan
there was a very targeted participation from the current Jean Monnet Chairs holders(Keio University and Aoyama Gakuin University). Particularly relevant was also theparticipation of a representative from the Asia-Europe Foundation. All the participants
were ``veterans`` of the curricular and institutional development of European Studies in
Asia, being part of a small but growing community formed in the last ten years.
The Roundtable begun with Dr. Silviu Jora from Kobe University, who made a review of
the European Studies as a discipline and its teaching in Asia, with the situation in
Japan taken as case study. The presentation was intended to ``warm up`` the audience
with a review on the issues faced by the European Studies programs in Japan and Asia
in general.
It has been underlined that considering the sinuous evolution and the ambiguities stillsurrounding the discipline even in Europe, nobody could expect a smooth emergenceof the European Studies programs in Asia. The materialization of the first coherent
European Studies programs in Asia in mid 1990s has been the result of a combinationof some exogenous and endogenous impulses. On the exogenous part, it was theimpetus coming from the part of EU with its new ``Asia Strategy`` (1994, renewed in2001) which included financial resources for supporting the ``mutual understanding`,
the most successful projects being those which were complementing the local
endeavors. A couple of years after the ``first wave`` of EU supported projects,

manywere discontinued due to the lack of finance and domestic commitment. Sometimes
the activity was continued at aminimal, and sometimes individual level. Dr. Jorafurther reminded that a ``second wave `` of programs begun with the extension of“Jean Monnet Action” to Asia in 2001, followed by the he “Asia-Link” program (2002)
and the larger programs focusing on establishing EU Studies Centers and Institutes in
China, Japan, Korea and, hopefully, India.
As a case study, Dr. Jora mentioned what he calls “The Japanese Paradox” whichrefers to the paradoxal discrepancy between the existence of a Western style academic
system and research facilities, a solid tradition of ties with Europe as well as a strong
interest in the dynamics of EU from a competitive perspective and, at the same time,
the absence until recently of any European Studies programs. In Dr. Jora’s view an2element of comparison for Japan is neither Europe nor the rest of Asia with its
specificities, it is the situation in the United States which host tens of European Studies
programs and is a source of specialized research on EU which often outclasses what is
produced in Europe. Therefore, Dr. Jora expects that if the US is hosting no less thanten “Jean Monnet Centers of Excellence”, Japan should have at least three such
centers around which academic degrees or specializations on EU issues should be
structured.
Further on, Dr. Jora insisted on the relation between the academic curricula and the``marketability`` of European Studies in Asia which would require a stricter and more
specific specialization. Therefore, creativity, adaptability, a combined approach andflexibility are all needed when tailoring a European Studies curricula for Asia.

As animmediate priority, Dr. Jora underlined the need for short term intensive professional
training programs in EU affairs for the Asian government officials, NGOs personnel and thecorporate executives interacting with the EU in various instances.

The European Studies situation in Japan was further detailed by Professor Shotaro
Hamamoto with a presentation on ``The EUIJ-Kansai Curriculum Development
Strategy``. Professor Hamamoto made a ``supply-consumer`` analysis. According toProfessor Hamamoto, from the ``supply`` side the major problem is the lack ofsufficient EU expertise at the Japanese universities, although there are numerous
sectoral specialists who may cover various EU elements (like the competition law) orindividual member states. In this context, presently, the structuring of an exclusive EU
curriculum in Japan might be rather difficult. At the same time, in the presenter’s view,probably the most critical issue is represented by the ``consumer`` side, the students
who are not motivated enough to study EU, first and foremost because there is not aclear link between the European/EU courses and their professional path. Especially forthe law students, the EU related subjects are not among those required for theentrance exam, the Bar exam or the civil service exam and therefore they remain withlittle motivation for studying an optional subject. Currently, the experimental ``EU
Studies Certificate`` offered by the EUIJ-Kansai has an ambiguous value for the
students and only the most ambitious and open minded will take the EU courses. Thus,
the EU related subjects as such should be better integrated within the faculty curricula( Law Faculty in this case) which, of course, requires more cooperation from the part of
University central administration and, more importantly, from the Ministry of Education.
A shift of focus from the undergraduate to the graduate level, respectively the creation3

of an MA degree in EU Studies is also a solution envisaged by Professor Hamamoto,providing that some related job market “niches’’ will be found for the holders of suchdegrees in Japan.
Similar views were expressed by Professor Katsuhiro Shoji in his presentation on“Teaching EU Law in Japan”. He also underlined that the law students in Japan arefocusing on passing the national Bar exam which concerns only Japanese law and, assuch, little spare time remains for studying other optional subjects like the EU Law.

The “Chinese Experience” was presented by Professor Gunter Heiduk who, as
academic evaluator of the latest ‘’European Studies Centers in China Program” (ESC),
benefited from a panoramic perspective on the issue. The experience coming fromadvising and evaluating the 20 Chinese ESC have shown that the main China-specificconstraints are among other things: the lack of university autonomy and administrative
flexibility to introduce new degree programs in European Studies; the lack ofexperience in cooperating in interdisciplinary teaching and research programs; the lackof Europe-specific skills (language), knowledge and expertise; the lack of a criticalnumber of experts in European Studies to establish full-fledged teaching programs and,of course, the lack of sufficiently clear professional perspectives. According toProfessor Heiduk, the ESCs are still a more or less ``alien`` entities within the
traditional institutional structure of Chinese universities and, as such, considering all
the above, the sustainability of the Chinese ESCs is still an open question.
Further on the ``Chinese World`` was the presentation of Professor Kenneth Chanrepresenting the Hong Kong Baptist University and the Institute of European Studies inMacau. Professor Chan indicated that Hong Kong and Macau programs offer a large
diversity of curricula focused on Europe, dynamically stretching from language andculture to European integration. According to him, in contrast with the mainland, thesituation in Hong Kong and Macau is different, due to the former colonial ties with
Europe and the cosmopolitanism and“westernization’’ characteristic for these

territories. Thus, in Hong Kong and Macau not less than five full fledged European
Studies degree programs can be found and their sinusoidal evolution is relevant for the
potential problems of all programs across Asia.
Professor Chan argued that the Hong Kong experience shows a highly flexible and4sometimes “ad hoc” approach to Europe from an “area studies” perspective, whereas
Macau has adopted an EU-oriented program at the postgraduate level. In contrast withthe ups and downs of the Hong Kong programs, the Institute of European Studies ofMacau had a more steady evolution by adopting viable measures to maintain arelatively stable balance between financial support, supply of expertise and student
intakes. What characterizes Macau is the reliance on the “imported” expertise in theform of visiting professorship. The administrative and financial support largely comesfrom the partnership with several governmental institutions, the institute being part ofthe official strategy of the “internationalization” of Macao. A steady stream of student
intakes is assured through the partnerships with several mainland universities.
Professor Chan concluded with the assertion that “the future shape of the European
Studies in Asia will be determined by the interplay of several factors like the availabilityof expertise; financial resources, the public perceptions and the actual job market
demand for the EU specialized graduates”.

In Korea, in comparative terms, the level of European Studies proliferation appears to
be rather good, this coming out from the presentation made by Professor Si Hong Kim
from Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (HUFS). Started hesitantly during the 1980s,
the proliferation of European Studies has been greatly facilitated by the mid 1990s
Korean Government initiative to support international studies. Consequently, twoEuropean programs were opened at HUFS and the Seoul National University (SNU).
Lately the Seoul National University hosts a first EU Studies Center as a three years
EU project. There are also two major associations for European Studies in Korea,
producing two related Journals. According to Professor Kim, the Korean European
Studies managers were forced to become more creative in administrative terms since2001 when the government funding has stopped. Nevertheless, considering the new
EU-Korea FTA and the renewed interest in compared models of regional cooperation,
there are further perspectives for the proliferation of European Studies in the Korean
Peninsula. Professor Kim also presented the results of some opinion surveys among
the students which indicate their interest for a more tailor made curricula focusing on
the applicability of European experiences to Asia and an overall stronger comparative
approach. Furthermore, in his view, some ``standardization`` of the European curricula
appears as a necessity for the future in parallel with the increase in number anddiversity of the academic programs focusing on Europe/EU in Korea.

5The Southeast Asian/ASEAN countries have been a primary ‘’target’’ for the
emergence of European Studies in Asia. However, a decade after, the situation ischaracterized by various disparities reflecting the local circumstances and individual
perseverance, as well as the level of interaction with the EU and the member states.
Meanwhile, a set of common issues can be identified.
The situation in Singapore was presented by Professor Barnad Turner, from the
National University of Singapore, which hosts the only program of this kind in the city
state. Professor Turner indicated that although the European Studies in the last years
took the shape of a cross departmental ``virtual program``, it still runs a full four year
BA honors-degree program. Professor Turner further exposed the ups and downs of aprogram in ``virtual`` form and the challenges which go beyond the institutional issues.
In this context Professor Turner went into a subtle ``perceptions`` analysis based on a
recent elite opinions survey. Thus, some socio-cultural challenges were revealed: theEU vs. the US (hard vs. soft power); indifference to the EU with its distant institutions;
Europe as a competitor; ambivalence to the British period and the post-colonial legacy.
As solutions, Prof. Turner suggested stronger ties with European universities; theadjustment of EU curricula to involve a strong comparative and inter-regional approach– ASEAN dimension, and eventually the setting up of an EU Studies Center with astarting financial support from Brussels. From the job market perspective Professor
Turner appreciated that the potential in Singapore is particularly good, considering thethousands of EU companies with their Asian regional headquarters located in the city.
Optimism, this is what characterizes the current European Studies situation in thePhilippines, this being reflected by the presentation of Mr. Atanacio Panahon, from theAteneo de Manila University. According to Mr. Panahon, the general conditions for the
proliferation of the studies focusing on Europe are particularly good in the Philippines
considering the three centuries of Spanish colonial influence, an the role played by theEuropean Catholic orders until today. Nevertheless only in the last 15 years some
Europe oriented programs started to take shape at three major universities from theMetro Manila. Although the initial start of 1996, ignited by an EU sponsored three
university consortium project, failed to pass the post financing sustainability test,
nevertheless, in the last years several multi-disciplinary degree courses have emerged
from the “ashes” of that initial program. Thus, the so called “ill fated’’ Philippines
experience might have been more successful than it was initially thought. The
European Studies Program at Ateneo de Manila University started in 1998 as a dual

6

track undergraduate program of international relations and global business and, since2001 more than 500 diplomas were awarded. De la Salle University offers both a BA
and an MA international studies degree with the European Studies major and Universityof the Philippines gives a BA in European Languages and culture. In comparative
terms, this is quite an achievement considering the rarity of degrees on European
studies offered across Asia. Mr. Panahon further offered various insights of the Ateneo
ESP with its managerial and curricular problems, not hesitating to show different
aspects which are to be corrected like the excessive focus of the pragmatic“professional” curricula orientation on the detriment of formal academic research. The“Ateneo” experience is also relevant in terms of finding flexible and innovative ways forachieving financial independence by revenue generating projects and various
partnerships with the corporate world, the choice of an “EU Business Track” curricula
being very suggestive.

There is quite a consensus that the ‘’ flag bearer” of the European Studies in Asia is the
program hosted by the Chulalongkorn University in Thailand, which gained notoriety byproving its continuous self sustainability since 1997. A sketchy presentation of the
program has been given by Professor Charit Tingsbadh, who underlined that theInterdisciplinary Department of European Studies, established since 1997 is one of thepioneers in Asia to offer a Master of Arts in European Studies as a full time one year
degree with a multidisciplinary feature. The academic expertise at “Chula” has beenassured through a prolific international networking strategy which assures an “import”
of more than eighty percent of the teaching stuff from Europe. Professor Tingsbadh
also mentioned the research side represented by the Centre for European Studies(CES) established in October 1997.

As for the situation in India, Professor Rajendra K Jain showed that indeed, it is a“particular case” with one of the oldest (since 1970) but also one of the most stagnant
European Studies programs in Asia. Rajendra K Jain, a veteran among the EU studies
promoters in the region, briefly traced the development of European Studies in India,
insisting on the characteristics of the institutional and curricula typology in comparison
with other programs in Asia. It was revealed that the postgraduate degree in European
Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) is the “one and only” program of this kindin the whole India out of 400 universities and a nation of more than one billion people.

7Some scattered EU related courses were also proliferating at a few other Indian
universities as spillovers of the JNU program. Professor Rajendra K Jain talked aboutan EU-India “mutual indifference” phenomenon, which is responsible for the low
visibility of the EU in India although the former is India’s largest trading partner. India issuffering from a lack of EU related domestic expertise while, in striking contrast withother Asian countries, the “imports”/visiting professorships from Europe are practicallynonexistent. India has not benefited until now from the exchange programs and the EC
sponsored academic training in Europe. India has not been on the list for any Asia Link
or Jean Monnet supported funding schemes for curricula development. There were no
special invitations from Brussels or from the European universities and, from their part,the Indian academics neglected the opportunities of cooperation with Europe or were
not skillful and motivated enough to follow the cumbersome application procedures. At
the same time, there are some reasons for optimism coming from a long delayed EU
program, following the “European Studies in China” model, which is preparing to launchfour ES Centers in India in the course of 2008. In the end, Professor Rajendra K Jain
indicated that, again, like in the case of all the other Asian countries, in India theinterest on a particular subject is strictly related to the employment perspectives and,without a carefully tailored curricula to meet the local expectations and realities, the EU
studies will remain something too exotic for an increasingly pragmatic public.
Having in mind the perceived need for a more professionally oriented European
Studies curricula, the EUIJ-Kansai has invited Dr. Wolfgang Pape from the EU-Japan
Centre for Industrial Cooperation. Dr. Pape explained that since its establishment in
1987, the Centre has been addressing the needs of business people in both the EU
and Japan through training programs, in-company internships, seminars, etc. From thepresentation of Dr. Pape we can deduct that a possible model for a professionallyoriented European Studies curricula could be based on the type of topics supported by
the EU-Japan Centre, which include: The EU Trading Scheme; European Energy
Efficiency Policy and the Eco design Directive; European Emissions Trading System;
Industrial Policy of the Automotive Industry in the EU; EU Industrial Policy and Service
Policy in the Internal Market; European Company Statute; Company Taxation and its
Effects on Japanese Companies in the EU; EU Corporate Tax Policy; EU Rules ofOrigin etc .
A general review on the European Studies situation in Asia would not have been
complete without a reminder of the catalytic role played by the Asia-Europe Foundation

8

(ASEF). In this respect, Mr. Peter Ryan, the ASEF Director for Intellectual Exchanges
made a presentation on the mission and role played by his organization with aparticular focus on the European Studies in Asia (ESiA) program established in 2005.

To summarize, a “moderate optimism” is what characterizes the current and future
prospects of European Studies situation in Asia. In East Asia, Japan is expected toshow a lot more in terms of European Studies proliferationconsidering its global

standing and the dynamic of interactions with the EU. As a high developed society,Japan would be expected to nurture a level of EU related academic interest close tothat existing in the US which means, keeping with the scale, at least three strong EU
Centers of Excellence and some spillovers in terms of EU courses spreading acrossthe country. The situation in Korea appears to be quite satisfactory with several
European/EU degree programs and research institutes. As for China, the mainland has
witnessed a European Studies “Big Bang in the last several years and it will take aperiod of “gestation” to see if the EC generated “implant” will take solid roots or not.
The Hong Kong and Macau territories show a rather high density of European/EU
degree programs and courses with a variable impact to the public, some curricular andmanagerial adjustments being needed on the way. The Southeast Asia/ASEAN region
shows a very diverse European Studies map with few “benchmarks” and still some“white spots’’ . The program at Chulalongkorn University in Thailand might represent
the “benchmark” although it failed to generate spillovers to the rest of the Thai
academic system. The Philippines indicates an unexpected optimism with threeprograms running independently since the failed EC consortium program at the end of
the last decade. Singapore continues to run a rather diluted and “virtual” European
Studies program living ground for much more while Malaysia has an emerging and yet
unconvincing program in Penang. Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos are currently not
hosting any EU Studies program, the biggest and most striking “white spot” being
Indonesia where an urgent EC supported “implant” would be needed considering thesize and importance of this country as well as the indications ofsome domestic

interest proven by the efforts of individual academics. Lastly, India would be probably
the biggest “white spot” on the map of the world of European Studies if wouldn’t be forthe old JNU Program and the scheduled 2008 launch of a set of four ES Centers.

From the debate following the paper presentations resulted a review of the challenges

9

waiting ahead for the development of European/EU Studies in Asia:-

On the administrative and financial side, the participation in the EU Programs
is very difficult for the Asian partners due to the cumbersome paper work andadministrative requirements and the lack of sufficient project management
expertise comparing with EU and US. Therefore, an “EU ProjectManagement” training program should be considered with priority as well as,
eventually, some adaptation of the EU administrative requirements to the
Asian specificities. On the financial aspects, probably more than in otherregions, the support from the EU is still essential for the sustainability andfurther proliferation of European Studies in Asia. In parallel, additional
financial resources are to be sought from the local budgets and private
resources although, until now, the success has been rather limited and theperspectives are not much brighter.

-

The European Studies curricula needs adaptation and flexibility to the local
specificities, along with a strong comparative approach. At undergraduatelevel, mono-disciplinarily will hardly wok in Asia while a narrow specialisation
would be more suitable at postgraduate level. At the same time, intensive
short term programs on EU issues are urgently needed for a selected
number of civil servants from key ministries and agencies. The professional
programs could be extended, on a commercial basis, to corporate employees.
A more “professional” EU curricula should also include a package of “EU
Project Management” courses.

-

The ‘’marketability” factor is probably the most common and critical challenge
facing the development of European Studies across Asia, both in institutionaland curricular terms. This issue is of particular importance considering theincreasingly pragmatic and career-oriented features currently characterizing
the educational process in Asia. A rise in the ``demand`` for European
studies in Asia is directly related to the identification of some clear
professional perspectives for the graduates. There is a need to encourage
Asian central administrations, as well as the corporate actors to value thecompetence and knowledge obtained through the European Studies
Programmes. The perspectives of employment offered by the private sectors
were not yet scrutinised enough while the current curricula do not offer

10enough on the kind of EU specialised knowledge required by the corporate
world. Therefore, on short and medium term, a more pragmatic andprofessionally oriented European Studies curricula is needed in Asia, with astrong comparative approach in closer partnership with the corporate actors.
-

At “perceptions” level, considering the current EU’s Global presence andmultidimensional impact, it should be no longer regarded as an idyllic andexotic topic but as a rigorous and pragmatic discipline with a hard technical,
legal and business related content.

The institutional and financial sustainability, the continuous commitment from
Brussels, the adaptation of curricula design to address the “marketability” and theregional “perceptions” , all are decisive factors in determining the evolution of theEuropean Studies in Asia and, not least, the dynamics of Asia-Europe relations.

11